Well-Known Member

Sorry not to agree with you on this, mate, I'll not try to convince you btw. To everyone his views. As far as I'm concerned, regarding the not-given penalty: after having seen replays, the pen wasn't as blatant as I first thought. Keita had already lost the ball when the defender came in. There was no way he could have done something with it, even if there hadn't been a foul. Even so, the pen could have been given, but it wasn't a stonewall penalty, rather a 50-50.

Fair enough. I'll respond all the same. It was a peno. Doesn't matter if he wasn't getting the ball. Anyone says any different are trying to change the rules. 3 bad decisions, 2 against 1 for. The 2 offsides wern't blatant as you make out. The linesman has a nano second to call them. Easy mistake to make. The only blatant decision was the peno if you actually judge it by the rules.

Looks like we have a few posters who have to try and be politically correct football fans. They can't say it how it is.

I think the discussion of referee bias and inconsistent is valid with that video. One can always say "it isn't enough to warrant a penalty", but let's cast our mind back at the 2-2 draw against Spurs last season. They won 2 penalties, one was saved and the other was an equaliser. The first was Harry Kane knocked the ball past Lovren, he tripped on Lovren's trailing leg and penalty was given. Then you have Lamela jumped in between the ball and Van Dijk as our defender swung his leg to clear the ball, and penalty was given. Go back further when we smashed United at Old Trafford in 2009, where Park Ji Sung could see Reina coming out, knocked the ball away and left his leg in to get caught by the sliding keeper, penalty was given.

In this case, it should be given if those cases above I have listed out was a penalty. We can call it incompetence, but the incompetence seemed to revolves around not awarding us the foul we should have won, or foul that should not be called against us. Yes I am well aware there are other instances where the referee didn't call for a pen for other teams, but the regularity that is hitting our club is quite puzzling.

I am not saying these guys had a chat before every match to try find ways to screw with us, no. But the unlucky bit our club been facing is something else. Coincidence? I don't know. But it has a trend and can be worryingly too coincidental.

Left wing.

I think the discussion of referee bias and inconsistent is valid with that video. One can always say "it isn't enough to warrant a penalty", but let's cast our mind back at the 2-2 draw against Spurs last season. They won 2 penalties, one was saved and the other was an equaliser. The first was Harry Kane knocked the ball past Lovren, he tripped on Lovren's trailing leg and penalty was given. Then you have Lamela jumped in between the ball and Van Dijk as our defender swung his leg to clear the ball, and penalty was given. Go back further when we smashed United at Old Trafford in 2009, where Park Ji Sung could see Reina coming out, knocked the ball away and left his leg in to get caught by the sliding keeper, penalty was given.

In this case, it should be given if those cases above I have listed out was a penalty. We can call it incompetence, but the incompetence seemed to revolves around not awarding us the foul we should have won, or foul that should not be called against us. Yes I am well aware there are other instances where the referee didn't call for a pen for other teams, but the regularity that is hitting our club is quite puzzling.

I am not saying these guys had a chat before every match to try find ways to screw with us, no. But the unlucky bit our club been facing is something else. Coincidence? I don't know. But it has a trend and can be worryingly too coincidental.

Hi Ed, firstly Ive tried to avoid this thread, it seems to be circulating in an unfathomable either/or. Secondly, Ive looked at that Keita penalty call three or four times, and it's not, to me anyway, a clear penalty. It could have been given, but technically, I think the ref got it right. @Lowton_Red has posted in the post-match, saying he has watched the game again, and he thinks Tierney did show bias towards us. I think I have seen this myself in other games, especially away in the CL. The problem is attributing cause, because it simultaneously seems it could coincide with home team bias, the sort of influence that gets a ref favouring the home team because of the crowds reaction. Out of fear of being booed and perhaps convention, and some other unconscionable factors.

My position on this is I think football is bias, the whole show is about preference, and then its up to the referees and FA to remain or appear impartial. And I do think some games have been swayed here and there for betting scams; I do think the mass base of football fans like to put down LFC, and also believe there is a social construct of a 'scouser' thats derogatory and has been propagated in the media, exploited even in shows like Bread and by the comedian John Bishop etc, but as a material output, it goes to bragging rights and banter, rivalry, ribaldry etc.

So I dont think the bias amounts to much more than fat to chew on. There is certainly no conspiracy to direct the Title towards or away from one club, but I think unconscionability has influenced things at times, Fergie being the obvious example. So there may be something unconscionable going on, but that divided with the countless other opportunities to win games, amounts to nothing to me. In the least, neither a ref nor a social attitude to a club can influence a striker to screw a shot wide, and we've missed far more of those than miss out on fouls and penalty calls. Refs are mostly erratic anyway and to impute this level of tinkering, as a stratagem, is other-worldly to me. Perhaps when we have AI refs there could be code to achieve it.........but the game is too fast for the human mind for that. I leave it with this:

Pareidolia is a psychological phenomenon that causes people to see patterns in a random stimulus. This often leads to people assigning human characteristics to objects.

"¿Plata... O Plomo?"

Hi Ed, firstly Ive tried to avoid this thread, it seems to be circulating in an unfathomable either/or. Secondly, Ive looked at that Keita penalty call three or four times, and it's not, to me anyway, a clear penalty. It could have been given, but technically, I think the ref got it right. @Lowton_Red has posted in the post-match, saying he has watched the game again, and he thinks Tierney did show bias towards us. I think I have seen this myself in other games, especially away in the CL. The problem is attributing cause, because it simultaneously seems it could coincide with home team bias, the sort of influence that gets a ref favouring the home team because of the crowds reaction. Out of fear of being booed and perhaps convention, and some other unconscionable factors.

My position on this is I think football is bias, the whole show is about preference, and then its up to the referees and FA to remain or appear impartial. And I do think some games have been swayed here and there for betting scams; I do think the mass base of football fans like to put down LFC, and also believe there is a social construct of a 'scouser' thats derogatory and has been propagated in the media, exploited even in shows like Bread and by the comedian John Bishop etc, but as a material output, it goes to bragging rights and banter, rivalry, ribaldry etc.

So I dont think the bias amounts to much more than fat to chew on. There is certainly no conspiracy to direct the Title towards or away from one club, but I think unconscionability has influenced things at times, Fergie being the obvious example. So there may be something unconscionable going on, but that divided with the countless other opportunities to win games, amounts to nothing to me. In the least, neither a ref nor a social attitude to a club can influence a striker to screw a shot wide, and we've missed far more of those than miss out on fouls and penalty calls. Refs are mostly erratic anyway and to impute this level of tinkering, as a stratagem, is other-worldly to me. Perhaps when we have AI refs there could be code to achieve it.........but the game is too fast for the human mind for that. I leave it with this:

Pareidolia is a psychological phenomenon that causes people to see patterns in a random stimulus. This often leads to people assigning human characteristics to objects.

City and Chelsea away Christmas 2013, shafted in 2 games in the space of 4 days. Both refs had plenty of previous with us, especially Webb who also fucked us over in the FA cup a few weeks later when he turned down the most blatant penalty I've ever seen for a foul on Suarez. Those 2 games cost us the title.

Resident Misanthrope

City and Chelsea away Christmas 2013, shafted in 2 games in the space of 4 days. Both refs had plenty of previous with us, especially Webb who also fucked us over in the FA cup a few weeks later when he turned down the most blatant penalty I've ever seen for a foul on Suarez. Those 2 games cost us the title.

★★★★★★

City and Chelsea away Christmas 2013, shafted in 2 games in the space of 4 days. Both refs had plenty of previous with us, especially Webb who also fucked us over in the FA cup a few weeks later when he turned down the most blatant penalty I've ever seen for a foul on Suarez. Those 2 games cost us the title.

Well-Known Member

Had a couple of posts deleted probably to save somebody´s feelings. So will rewrite it but not in response to anyone in particular.

Using the goal against Southampton and the fact that Salah was offside to prove lack of bias is ridiculous. Firstly, They had tons of chances to clear it. When does the offside cease to matter? It´s like saying a wrongly given freekick in the area and hoofed up to the oppostion area which results in a goal is because of the freekick. Ridiculous.

Well-Known Member

Hi Ed, firstly Ive tried to avoid this thread, it seems to be circulating in an unfathomable either/or. Secondly, Ive looked at that Keita penalty call three or four times, and it's not, to me anyway, a clear penalty. It could have been given, but technically, I think the ref got it right. @Lowton_Red has posted in the post-match, saying he has watched the game again, and he thinks Tierney did show bias towards us. I think I have seen this myself in other games, especially away in the CL. The problem is attributing cause, because it simultaneously seems it could coincide with home team bias, the sort of influence that gets a ref favouring the home team because of the crowds reaction. Out of fear of being booed and perhaps convention, and some other unconscionable factors.

My position on this is I think football is bias, the whole show is about preference, and then its up to the referees and FA to remain or appear impartial. And I do think some games have been swayed here and there for betting scams; I do think the mass base of football fans like to put down LFC, and also believe there is a social construct of a 'scouser' thats derogatory and has been propagated in the media, exploited even in shows like Bread and by the comedian John Bishop etc, but as a material output, it goes to bragging rights and banter, rivalry, ribaldry etc.

So I dont think the bias amounts to much more than fat to chew on. There is certainly no conspiracy to direct the Title towards or away from one club, but I think unconscionability has influenced things at times, Fergie being the obvious example. So there may be something unconscionable going on, but that divided with the countless other opportunities to win games, amounts to nothing to me. In the least, neither a ref nor a social attitude to a club can influence a striker to screw a shot wide, and we've missed far more of those than miss out on fouls and penalty calls. Refs are mostly erratic anyway and to impute this level of tinkering, as a stratagem, is other-worldly to me. Perhaps when we have AI refs there could be code to achieve it.........but the game is too fast for the human mind for that. I leave it with this:

Pareidolia is a psychological phenomenon that causes people to see patterns in a random stimulus. This often leads to people assigning human characteristics to objects.

You are getting confused with apophenia, which is the phenomenon of linking random activity into patterns. Parediola is more concerned with objects assuming human form.
Whilst we are delving into all things psychological I suggest exploring "concrete thinking", a phenomenon which sees the person being unable to stray beyond their fixed reality. Randomness or chance dont appear to be traits the concrete thinker can compute

Looking for Clues...

Isnt it great!! To be honest, this keeps the debate in here. There was straying into a post match thread, and I was partially guilty, so keeping the siscussion here is better.
That said, when discussing the Keita penalty etc it is unfair to direct someone to the "Conspiracy Thread" because their opinion differs. But in general it is better to debate in here.
I do wish the thread title was changed (again) as it doesnt mirror the majority of the views posited in here.

Well-Known Member

Article written by Shearer on the BBC website. At the end there is a list of teams that came closet to winning the quadruple. guess who´s name doesn´t appear? Yes Livepool´s despite the fact we won the triple twice. In 1984 we won the League, League Cup, The European Cup and got knocked out in the 4th round of the FA cup. Guess who´s name appears? Yes Nottingham Forest´s.

★★★★★★

Article written by Shearer on the BBC website. At the end there is a list of teams that came closet to winning the quadruple. guess who´s name doesn´t appear? Yes Livepool´s despite the fact we won the triple twice. In 1984 we won the League, League Cup, The European Cup and got knocked out in the 4th round of the FA cup. Guess who´s name appears? Yes Nottingham Forest´s.

I agree, in the end who cares but I just thought it a bit strange/coincidental, what´s another word I´m looking for? it´s on the tip of my tongue...Nope it won´t come. Of course it couldn´t possibly be could it.

Well-Known Member

We get denied a blatant penalty. The score ends 0-0, lots of fans up in arms and some politically correct, I´m so unbiased, I´m level headed fan says ´´We shouldn´t need the refs help to get a result.´´ What utter nonsense. What´s the point of a ref if not to enforce the rules.

Looking for Clues...

We get denied a blatant penalty. The score ends 0-0, lots of fans up in arms and some politically correct, I´m so unbiased, I´m level headed fan says ´´We shouldn´t need the refs help to get a result.´´ What utter nonsense. What´s the point of a ref if not to enforce the rules.